Prevention, diagnosis, and management of venous thromboembolism in the critically ill surgical and trauma patient

Sequential Compression Device Compliance for Venous Thromboembolism in High-Risk Trauma: A Quality Improvement Study

BACKGROUND

Hospital-acquired, perioperative venous thromboembolism is a recognized patient safety indicator in the adult trauma patient population. Mechanical prophylaxis has been identified as a standard intervention to reduce the incidence of venous thromboembolism when prescribed along with anticoagulation or if anticoagulation is contraindicated in the surgical population. Adherence to consistent mechanical prophylaxis remains a nursing issue impacted by numerous factors in patient care.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this quality improvement project was to improve the compliance of sequential compression device utilization to decrease the hospital-acquired, perioperative venous thromboembolism rate in the adult hospitalized trauma patient population.

METHODS

A pre- and postintervention quality improvement approach utilized a nurse-led strategy to engage multidisciplinary team members to increase the consistency of sequential compression device utilization on patients within trauma units. The patient safety indicator rate per 1,000 for hospital-acquired, perioperative venous thromboembolism was monitored for improvement.

RESULTS

The patient safety indicator rate per 1,000 for hospital-acquired, perioperative venous thromboembolism demonstrated a decline from 10.60 to 4.95 rate per 1,000 over 12 months. In the trauma units, sequential compression device compliance increased from an initial direct observation audit of only 12% to an average of 65% compliance rate during the last 16-week audits.

CONCLUSION

We found that a multidisciplinary, nurse-driven approach in the trauma units was effective in improving the compliance of sequential compression device utilization and impacted the hospital acquired, perioperative venous thromboembolism rate in the adult trauma patient population.

Thrombosis associated with ventriculoatrial shunts

Ventriculoatrial shunts are the most common second-line procedure for cases in which ventriculoperitoneal shunts are unsuitable. Shunting-associated thrombosis is a potentially life-threatening complication after ventriculoatrial shunt insertion. The overall prevalence of this complication is still controversial because of substantial differences in the numbers found in studies using clinical data and in those analyzing postmortem findings. The etiology of thrombosis may be multifactorial, including shunt catheter itself, contents of cerebrospinal fluid, shunt infection, and genetic disorder. The clinical presentation can vary widely, ranging from asymptomatic to a life-threatening condition. Timely recognition of thromboembolic lesions is critical for treatment. However, early diagnosis and management is still challenging because of a relatively long asymptomatic latency and lack of clear guideline recommendations. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of ventriculoatrial shunt thrombosis, especially to focus on its etiopathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention.

A retrospective cohort study of disease-related risk factors for central venous catheter-related symptomatic thrombosis in intensive care unit inpatients

Central venous catheters (CVC) are widely used in critically ill patients given their benefits in monitoring vital signs, treatment administration, and renal replacement therapy in intensive care unit (ICU) patients, but these catheters have the potential to induce symptomatic catheter-related venous thrombosis (CRVT). This study reported the rate of symptomatic CRVT in ICU patients receiving CVC and analyzed the disease-related risk factors for symptomatic CRVT in ICU patients.A retrospective analysis was performed on the consecutive ICU 1643 critically ill patients with CVCs inserted from January 2015 to December 2019. Symptomatic CRVT was confirmed by ultrasound. CVCs were divided into 2 groups based on the presence of symptomatic CRVT, and the variables were extracted from the electronic medical record system. Logistic univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to determine the disease-related risk factors of symptomatic CRVT.A total of 209 symptomatic CRVT events occurred among 2114 catheters. The rate of CRVT was 9.5 per 1000 catheter days. Univariate analysis revealed that trauma, major surgery, heart failure, respiratory failure, and severe acute pancreatitis were risk factors for symptomatic CRVT in the ICU. Multivariate analysis showed that trauma (odds ratio [OR], 2.046; 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.325-3.160], P = .001), major surgery (OR, 2.457; 95% CI [1.641-3.679], P = .000), and heart failure (OR, 2.087; 95% CI [1.401-3.111], P = .000) were independent disease-related risk factors for symptomatic CRVT in ICU. The C-statistic for this model was 0.61 (95% CI [0.57-0.65], P = .000).The incidence rate of symptomatic CRVT in the ICU population was 9.5 per 1000 catheter days. Trauma, major surgery, and heart failure are independent disease-related risk factors of symptomatic CRVT.

Compliance with American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) recommendations for thromboembolic prophylaxis in the intensive care unit: a level I trauma center experience

Background

Recommendations are for nearly universal venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in critically ill hospitalized patients because of their well-recognized risks. In those intensive care units (ICUs) where patient care is more uniformly directed, it may be expected that VTE prophylaxis would more closely follow this standard over units that are less uniform, such as open-model ICUs.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study on all patients aged 18+ admitted to an open ICU between 6/1/2017 and 5/31/2018. Patients were excluded if they had instructions to receive comfort measures only or required therapeutic anticoagulant administration. Prophylaxis administration practices, including administration of mechanical and/or pharmacologic prophylaxis and delayed (≥48 h post-ICU admission) initiation of pharmacologic prophylaxis, were compared between patients admitted to the ICU by the trauma service versus other departments. Root causes for opting out of pharmacological prophylaxis were documented and compared between the two study groups.

Results

One-hundred two study participants were admitted by the trauma service, and 98 were from a non-trauma service. Mechanical (98% trauma vs. 99% non-trauma, P = 0.99) and pharmacologic (54% vs. 44%, P = 0.16) prophylaxis rates were similar between the two admission groups. The median time from ICU admission to pharmacologic prophylaxis initiation was 53 h for the trauma service and 10 h for the non–trauma services (P ≤ 0.01). In regression analyses, trauma-service admission (odds ratio (OR) = 2.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21–6.83) and increasing ICU length of stay (OR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.05–1.21) were independently associated with pharmacologic prophylaxis use. Trauma-service admission (OR = 8.30, 95% CI 2.18–31.56) and increasing hospital length of stay (OR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.03–1.28) were independently associated with delayed prophylaxis initiation.

Conclusions

Overall, the receipt of VTE prophylaxis of any type was close to 100%, due to the nearly universal use of mechanical compression devices among ICU patients in this study. However, when examining pharmacologic prophylaxis specifically, the rate was considerably lower than is currently recommended: 54% among the trauma services and 44% among non-trauma services.

Risk of Clinically Relevant Venous Thromboembolism in Critically Ill Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Early during the course of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, reports suggested alarmingly high incidences for thromboembolic events in critically ill patients with COVID-19. However, the clinical relevance of these events was not reported in several studies. Additionally, more recent research showed contradictory results and suggested substantially lower rates of venous thromboembolism. Thus, the aim of the present study was to summarize evidence on the incidence of clinically relevant venous thromboembolism (VTE)—defined as VTE excluding isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism (PE) and distal deep vein thrombosis (DVT)—in adult critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Methods: We performed a systematic review of studies reporting the incidence of clinically relevant PE and/or DVT in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Scientific reports published in the English language between January and October 2020 were included. We conducted a random-effects model meta-analysis to calculate incidence estimates of clinically relevant VTE and bleeding events. We also performed exploratory meta-regression and subgroup analyses of different diagnostic approaches and additional factors that possibly influenced the incidence of these outcomes.

Results: Fifty-four articles (5,400 patients) fulfilled the predefined inclusion criteria, of which 41 had a high risk of bias. The majority of included patients were male, > 60 years, and overweight. Twenty-one studies reported the use of prophylactic doses of heparin. Pooled incidences for clinically relevant PE were estimated at 8% (95% CI, 4–11%), for proximal DVT at 14% (95% CI, 9–20%), and—after exclusion of studies with a high risk of bias—for the composite outcome of VTE at 18% (95% CI, 13–24%). Clinically relevant bleeding occurred at a rate of 6% (95% CI, 2–9%).

Conclusions: We summarized currently available data on the rate of clinically relevant VTE in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Pooled incidence estimates were lower than those reported by previous review articles. In the absence of evidence-based anticoagulation guidelines for critically ill patients with COVID-19, the results of our study provide clinically important information for an individual risk-benefit assessment in this context.

Registration: The study protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO on June 22, 2020 (CRD42020193353; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero).

Accuracy of identifying hospital acquired venous thromboembolism by administrative coding: implications for big data and machine learning research

Big data analytics research using heterogeneous electronic health record (EHR) data requires accurate identification of disease phenotype cases and controls. Overreliance on ground truth determination based on administrative data can lead to biased and inaccurate findings. Hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism (HA-VTE) is challenging to identify due to its temporal evolution and variable EHR documentation. To establish ground truth for machine learning modeling, we compared accuracy of HA-VTE diagnoses made by administrative coding to manual review of gold standard diagnostic test results. We performed retrospective analysis of EHR data on 3680 adult stepdown unit patients identifying HA-VTE. International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9-CM) codes for VTE were identified. 4544 radiology reports associated with VTE diagnostic tests were screened using terminology extraction and then manually reviewed by a clinical expert to confirm diagnosis. Of 415 cases with ICD-9-CM codes for VTE, 219 were identified with acute onset type codes. Test report review identified 158 new-onset HA-VTE cases. Only 40% of ICD-9-CM coded cases (n = 87) were confirmed by a positive diagnostic test report, leaving the majority of administratively coded cases unsubstantiated by confirmatory diagnostic test. Additionally, 45% of diagnostic test confirmed HA-VTE cases lacked corresponding ICD codes. ICD-9-CM coding missed diagnostic test-confirmed HA-VTE cases and inaccurately assigned cases without confirmed VTE, suggesting dependence on administrative coding leads to inaccurate HA-VTE phenotyping. Alternative methods to develop more sensitive and specific VTE phenotype solutions portable across EHR vendor data are needed to support case-finding in big-data analytics.